Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The deep roots of modern resentment

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 123 posts

Re: The deep roots of modern resentment

#41

Post by stinkytaco »

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #15
dandare wrote: post #5

Sometimes I feel like the more has been achieved by western liberalism the more is it being criticized for not magically fixing everything there is to be fixed. Coincidentally those who criticize it never offer alternative realistic solutions.

In my perspective, the issue is less that the critics decline to offer alternative realistic solutions, but rather that they seek to repackage discredited and harmful solutions (like supply-side economics) as being the correct fix if only it gets implemented correctly and without opposition meddling. This line of argument is also often used to whitewash Communism by saying things along the line of: "Communism would w…

Perhaps part of the problem is our desire to bundle solutions into grand theories, like supply-side economics or Marxism? I agree that we can beat a horse over and over again until there's nothing left to see, but small changes are how the world actually works. I can say "lowering taxes on producers of x can stimulate growth" or "increased public investment in industry y will resolve the problems it currently experiences" and those things occur all the time. But they also don't sell books.

EDIT: Perhaps a better way of stating this is our desire to package academically useful economic models into grand policy solutions.

Re: The deep roots of modern resentment

#42

Post by crdoconnor »

compiler-guy wrote: post #8
EekSnakePond wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes we do. It's just those who have benefited from this arrangement the most happen to also control the relationships that power mass media, which is then used to undermine alternative solutions as "racist", "sexist" and "evil" with no evidence whatsoever and immediately engage in mob swarming and plebeian intimidation. For example: Western Liberalism absolutely requires cheap brown people. (And that deep reliance AB…

This is another criticism, not an alternative proposal. Please give an alternative proposal.

Raise the minimum wage to $20/hour.

Watch as "serious economists" lie about:

* All of the jobs that will actually not disappear.

* All of the prices that will actually not rise (by much).

And try really really hard to pretend that:

* Raising the minimum wage doesn't channel profits into the pockets of workers.

What surprises me isn't that they lie. What surprises me is that people continue to believe them.

Re: The deep roots of modern resentment

#43

Post by rm_-rf_slash »

EekSnakePond wrote: post #26
rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are conflating economic neoliberalism (which is neither new nor contemporarily liberal) with social liberalism. They are not the same and nobody is pretending that they are. I still fail to see your connection: 1: Slaves 2: Democracy 3: ???? 4: Profit(?) Could you explain with links or examples how exactly slavery (or economic peonage, depending on your definition), is required to maintain a democracy?

> You are conflating economic neoliberalism with social liberalism. I agree it appears I'm making this conflation. But > nobody is pretending that they are: Is not an honest statement. Any attempt to make cheap brown labor more expensive through legislation (See the Trump protests) or even by IMPROVING their quality of life (See gentrification) is instantly fought off as racist. The powers that be have deeply merged…

>Is not an honest statement. Any attempt to make cheap brown labor more expensive through legislation (See the Trump protests) or even by IMPROVING their quality of life (See gentrification) is instantly fought off as racist.

For the third time, I ask for a specific example. A link. Something. Otherwise I think you are either trolling or positing biased statements that are not backed up by facts.

Re: The deep roots of modern resentment

#44

Post by rdtsc »

Interestingly it was specifically leftist thinkers and personalities who have been against globalization as promoted by free-market capitalism. That might seems shocking in light of recent election rhetoric.

https://chomsky.info/secrets03/

---

About half of what are called US exports to Mexico are intrafirm transfers of this sort. They don’t enter the Mexican market, and there’s no meaningful sense in which they’re exports to Mexico. Still, that’s called "trade."

---

This interview by Sanders on Vox is also very illustrative:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5vOKKMipSA&t=352

---

Bernie Sanders: Open borders? No, that's a Koch brothers proposal. Ezra Klein: Really? Bernie Sanders: Of course. That's a right-wing proposal, which says essentially there is no United States. ...

---

It is sad really. People keep calling those who voted and promoted Hillary "the left" but there is not much "left" left in there. Trump apparently took the traditional bread-and-butter leftist issues NAFTA and jobs and ran with it. Whether he cares for those things or not, at least he picked them up. So the Democrats ended up with identity politics, mixed with corporatism. They are trying to appeal to Occupy Wall St. and also give $200k speeches to Wall St., they are for gay rights but also take donations from states which throw gays off of buildings. It was rather upsetting when during the nightclub shooting in Orlando, Hillary's campaign and the rest of the media moved quickly to suppress the news because it involved a what apparently an Islamic Terrorist attack. I know a few gay people who never quite got over that and never forgot it...

Moreover on identity politics and the left. Has Marx never wrote anything about labeling groups correctly so they don't get offended? It was always about being very offended, specifically offending the ownership class and not just offending them, but annihilating them.

Maybe one good thing about Trump winning is that it cleared the table for creation of a new political party. A more authentic left party. Those people who followed Sanders what happened to them? There such tremendous energy there. Is it wasted on boycotting Uber, and re-tweeting the same things over and over... I am afraid it is.

Re: The deep roots of modern resentment

#45

Post by guard-of-terra »

sahaj wrote: post #32
EekSnakePond wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That isn't a proposal to replace capitalism Put down the Marxism for 5 seconds and follow my original premise all the way to it's logical end. - Make the slaves as expensive as the natives. - Why would you need slaves in this scenario? - You wouldn't. - If slaves and natives are equal cost, then machines are given incentives to outperform both. - Western liberalism is completely flipped on its head in a world where…

The "right" hates the idea of a minimum wage.

Because the "right" don't want to earn minimum wage; they want to earn decent wage, which is problematic in condition of "race to the bottom" caused by influx of people from less developed countries.

Re: The deep roots of modern resentment

#46

Post by the_duke »

rdtsc wrote: post #44

Interestingly it was specifically leftist thinkers and personalities who have been against globalization as promoted by free-market capitalism. That might seems shocking in light of recent election rhetoric. https://chomsky.info/secrets03/ --- About half of what are called US exports to Mexico are intrafirm transfers of this sort. They don’t enter the Mexican market, and there’s no meaningful sense in which they’re e…

Just a few years back, it was the Conservative parties (not just the US) advocating Globalisation/free trade/free markets yadda yadda, and the liberals opposing the above because of labour exploitation, global supply chains bad for the environment...

But memories fade quickly...

Then again, Trump's positions are really not so representative of the establishment republicans.

Re: The deep roots of modern resentment

#47

Post by stinkytaco »

droopyEyelids wrote: post #38
dandare wrote: post #5

Sometimes I feel like the more has been achieved by western liberalism the more is it being criticized for not magically fixing everything there is to be fixed. Coincidentally those who criticize it never offer alternative realistic solutions.

I strongly disagree. But I think i understand where you're coming from, because instead of 'alternatives' the answer is to stop doing many of our western liberal behaviors. The alternative to a campaign of drone warfare is to not do the campaign. The alternative to regime change and overthrow of democratically elected governments is to treat the nation as a sovereign nation, and not overthrow their government. The al…

Not doing things has consequences too. Choosing not to oppose Assad in Syria is undeniably bad for somebody. This is precisely the purpose of government, to decide what to do or not to do.

Re: The deep roots of modern resentment

#48

Post by andrepd »

EekSnakePond wrote: post #19
compiler-guy wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't a proposal to replace capitalism, that is a small detail of a proposal. A single sentence that is a kernel of an idea (and probably a good one), but far from a sufficient argument. Please give an alternative proposal. A link is fine.

> That isn't a proposal to replace capitalism Put down the Marxism for 5 seconds and follow my original premise all the way to it's logical end. - Make the slaves as expensive as the natives. - Why would you need slaves in this scenario? - You wouldn't. - If slaves and natives are equal cost, then machines are given incentives to outperform both. - Western liberalism is completely flipped on its head in a world where…

Maybe if you weren't so brazenly agressive and didn't begin every comment with a derisive remark people would pay more attention to you. I know we all must seem very silly and insignificant in comparison to your massive intellect that you can but roll your eyes, but bear with us, will you?

Sheesh.

Re: The deep roots of modern resentment

#49

Post by crdoconnor »

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #15
dandare wrote: post #5

Sometimes I feel like the more has been achieved by western liberalism the more is it being criticized for not magically fixing everything there is to be fixed. Coincidentally those who criticize it never offer alternative realistic solutions.

In my perspective, the issue is less that the critics decline to offer alternative realistic solutions, but rather that they seek to repackage discredited and harmful solutions (like supply-side economics) as being the correct fix if only it gets implemented correctly and without opposition meddling. This line of argument is also often used to whitewash Communism by saying things along the line of: "Communism would w…

Communism's "discreditation" was the result of a decades long propaganda campaign and their descent into authoritarianism which isn't all that different to that which many capitalist countries went through (or some are currently going through).

You hear plenty of "well, capitalism would work fine too if it were just implemented correctly". That's exactly as stupid.

Re: The deep roots of modern resentment

#50

Post by guard-of-terra »

compiler-guy wrote: post #28
beat wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are almost always No True Scotsman fallacies. Supply-side failed because it wasn't supply-side enough . Etc.

It's not unlike abstinence-only birth control. Practiced perfectly, yes, abstinence is 100% effective at preventing pregnancy. There is no question about that. And yes, some small fraction of people do manage to practice complete abstinence, and reap the benefit of not getting pregnant. But as a policy, abstinence only for broad swaths of the population is a total disaster.

Offtopic-ish:

> some small fraction of people do manage to practice complete abstinence

I actually think it's a pretty large fraction, but they do it out of inability to secure a mate. The people for whom supply and demand curves never cross.

It's much harder to reason why a person capable of having a life will choose to not to.

Post reply on HN